Talk:Rabastan Lestrange
Rabastan Lestrange is that him?.....oh, i figured that, but....hmm never mind :Yes that picture is him, Rabastan Lestranges appearance in Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (film) is played by actor Richard Trinder and his scenes invole him holding Ginny Weasley hostage in the Department of Mysteries. Incorrect. The man is Travers played by Tav MacDougall. Jayden Matthews 10:15, 9 August 2009 (UTC) Yes, some of the information is incorrect.But the names of the actors are properly assigned, so we can say that richard trinder plays rabastan.Pol 871 10:39, July 8, 2010 (UTC) ::Why can we say that? Where's the proof? Jayden Matthews 11:27, July 8, 2010 (UTC) ::See: http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0065595/bio. :::IMDB is not a reliable source, as anyone can edit it. Same as anyone can edit this wiki. As far as I'm aware there are no official sources that say which Death Eaters are which. Jayden Matthews 11:33, July 8, 2010 (UTC) :::Then we should ask ourselves if we really Richard Cubison played Dolohov,no?Pol 871 11:36, July 8, 2010 (UTC) ::::I'm afraid so. IMDB and Wikipedia both claim that Cubison played Dolohov, but due to their editable natures, they are subject to false information, as are we. Jayden Matthews 11:42, July 8, 2010 (UTC) Richard Trinder either Plays Rabastan or Rodolphus (In Order of the Phoenix and Deathly Hallows Part 2) Arben Bajrakrarj plays Antonin Dolohov (Order of the Phoenix, Deathly Hallows Part 1 and 2) Tav MacDougall plays Travers (Order of the Phoenix) Richard Cubison plays Jugson (Order of the Phoenix) Walden Macnair is played by Peter Best (Prisoner of Azkaban, Order of The Phoenix) Is this him? Assuming Richard Trinder's character is Rodolphus, of course, the Death Eater in Deathly Hallows Part 2 who says "No sign of him, my lord" certainly isn't Dolohov (who says it in the book) but is thin and nervous-looking, which the Goblet of Fire book uses to describe Rabastan, could that be him? Ghostkaiba297 07:34, November 30, 2011 (UTC) Are Rodolphus and Rabastan Lestrange the great-grandsons of F. Lestrange? To me, it all fits. With the dates for F. Lestrange (1854) and R. Lestrange (1867) being so close it is likely that R. Lestrange was his son. It is also likely that the Lestrange in 1926 was the grandson of R. Lestrange and thus, Rodolphus and Rabastan Lestrange are, most likely, the great-grandsons of R. Lestrange and the great-great-grandsons of F. Lestrange. Do you agree? HarryPotterRules1 02:22, February 24, 2012 (UTC) :No, there's nothing to indicate the degree of their relationship. And please don't insert fanon or speculation into the articles without a source in the future. -- 1337star (Owl Post) 00:54, February 24, 2012 (UTC) I have looked over my original evaluation and have changed my mind a bit; It sorts of makes sense though; 1867 - 1926 is 59 and is way to old to be having a child, even for Purebloods. So Lestrange has to be the grandson of either F. Lestrange or R. Lestrange (it depends if F. Lestrange is the father of R. Lestrange; they might just be brothers), which means that Rodolphus, born in 1951 and Rabastan, born sometime after him, are, most likely, the kids of the Lestrange from 1926 which makes them the great-grandkids of F. Lestrange or R. Lestrange. HarryPotterRules1 02:23, February 24, 2012 (UTC) Younger brother I cannot find any reference that backs the claim that Rabastan was younger than his brother Rodolphus. Anyone? -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 20:54, July 8, 2013 (UTC) :Bellatrix had no children. She said "If I had a child, I would happily sacrifice them to the dark lord," or something like that to Narcissa. --Bad Wolf 13:01, August 27, 2013 (UTC) ::Sorry, Rabbitty! But what has your comment to do with this question? [[User:Harry granger| Harry granger ]][[User talk:Harry granger| ' Talk ']] 19:48, August 27, 2013 (UTC) :::I was wondering about the same thing. We're talking about the relative ages of Rabastan and Rodolphus, who are brothers, not children of Bellatrix. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:18, August 27, 2013 (UTC) :::It's done from the dates given in OOTP. Rodolphus hung around, at Hogwarts, with Snape. Snape began in 1971, so Rodolphus had to have been born between September 1st 1953 (which would let him miss the year gap and still be in 7th year when Snape begins) and 1963 (he is 18 and old enough to be, legally, imprisoned in Azkaban); as for Rabastan - he is said to not have hung around with Snape, but was old enough, in 1981, to be legally imprisoned in Azkaban, making him at least 17. By that, we can put Rodolphus's birthdates as "between September 1st 1953 - 1963" and Rabastans as "in or before 1964"; this makes Rodolphus anywhere between 18 and 28 and Rabastan around 17. :::I don't mind if you disagree - that's just my two cents. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 13:13, August 28, 2013 (UTC) :Ok, Rodolphus could be with Snape at Hogwarts. But, why Rabastan could not be older than his brother? In your explication, you used "Rabastan is younger" as information. So yes, he was old enough to be send to Azkaban, but he could be older than Rodolphus. In this case too, he would be old enough. Lady Junky 14:22, August 28, 2013 (UTC) :True, but Bellatrix married him; if she was to make a "noble, pureblood marriage" as she did, surely it'd be with the heir? Money would be useful to Voldemort's cause and a younger son - Rabastan - would not have much. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 14:52, August 28, 2013 (UTC) :It is only a supposition by you. Rodolphus could have been chosen because their ages can be almost the same. Moreover, Rabastan could have a wife too. It is not known for now, so why he could not? Particularly because, as you said, he is a member of a noble and pureblood family :) Lady Junky 15:08, August 28, 2013 (UTC) :Rabastan can't have a wife as he's been imprisoned in Azkaban since 1981 - no time for marriage; and after his public escape would be announced, surely a wife - if he had one - would be brought in for questioning? Also, Bellatrix, being devoted to Voldemort, would marry the head of the family - or heir - so that she could have "lots of money" to serve Voldemort with; to bribe people, like Lucius does. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 17:29, August 28, 2013 (UTC) ::And I can hear already Seth Cooper: "Pure speculation". :D And that it was. [[User:Harry granger| Harry granger ]][[User talk:Harry granger| ' Talk ']] 17:38, August 28, 2013 (UTC) ::I never said it wasn't ''pure speculation - occasionally, it ''is required to come to an answer. HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 17:56, August 28, 2013 (UTC) ::I won't continue this discussion because, again, you will be stubborn and rude with us ^^ It is speculation. So, as Harry Granger said, Seth would say we don't know. We can't prove for now if Rabastan is older than Rodolphus :) Lady Junky 18:09, August 28, 2013 (UTC) I have new info that proves me right. Rabastan has to be at least 17 to be sent to Azkaban; yet, Rodolphus hung around with Snape so has to be born between September 1953 (to miss the 1964 start and begin in 1965 and be in his 6th/7th year when Snape began) and 1963 (any younger and he and Rabastan would be too young to go to Azkaban in 1981.) Thus, Rodolphus is the elder and Rabastan the younger. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 15:35, December 8, 2013 (UTC) : That isn't "new info", it's the same case you've already presented. True, Rabastan wasn't said to have hung around with Snape, but there could be a multitude of reasons for that. Not liking Snape (not hard to imagine, is it?) would be one explanation. And as someone else has pointed out, Rabastan could already have finished Hogwarts (or dropped out). Speculation is never "necessary". We our called upon to record facts, not "come up with answears".-- 17:35, December 8, 2013 (UTC) ::Please provide evidence that one has to be seventeen to be incarcerated in Azkaban. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 18:13, December 8, 2013 (UTC) ::Fudge didn't suggest sending Harry to Azkaban in his trial; he merely suggested expulsion and, as Minister for Magic, he is well within his rights to suggest Azkaban imprisonment - he did to Dumbledore, after all. As well as this, Rabastan uses magic - outside of Hogwarts - to torture Alice and Frank, so was at least 17 in 1981, making him born in 1964 at the latest. Thus, by both these, 17 is the minimum age to go to Azkaban.--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 22:19, December 8, 2013 (UTC) :::Please provide evidence that a single breach of the Statue of Secrecy and Decree for the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery is sufficient to warrant time in Azkaban. In fact, Fudge states exactly the opposite in Prisoner of Azkaban ("We don’t send people to Azkaban just for blowing up their aunts!"), though it could be argued that he was, at the time, adamant on getting on Harry's good side and keeping him safe. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 01:33, December 9, 2013 (UTC) :::Harry has broken the decree 3 times; Dobby and the cake; Marge; Dementor - all valid enough to get him sent to Azkaban. The fact that Fudge didn't suggest it for him - merely explusion and snapping of a wand - and did suggest it for Dumbledore, to me, at least, seems enough to be relatively sure that anyone underage cannot go to Azkaban. As for the blowing up their aunts, the fact that Tom laughs and points at Fudge could imply he did it too; in that case, Fudge would be understanding, even in OOtP. And, anyway, I wasn't saying that Rabastan went to Azkaban for breaking the decree. I was saying, the fact that he used Magic outside of Hogwarts and was only caught later and brought in for trial, implies and almost directly states that he was not under seventeen at the time and was of age and left Hogwarts.--HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 01:50, December 9, 2013 (UTC) ::::And, again, you fail to directly address my concerns, instead circumventing them with meaningless points. Unless you have direct evidence that Harry's crimes could land him in Azkaban in the first place, and the reason he wasn't placed in Azkaban was because he was underage, I think we're done here. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 01:57, December 9, 2013 (UTC) ::::In a minute, I am going to *insert swear here* scream; YOU in the first place, misunderstood ME. I said Fudge did not suggest that Harry go to Azkaban for underage magic, implying that you can't. Hell, Hagrid, still at Hogwarts and UNDER-FREAKING-AGE!!!!!!!!! was framed for releasing a Basilisk and didn't go to Azkaban for that! To me, that's enough to say someone underage cannot go to Azkaban, no matter how many times the law is broken. Lily broke the law at sometime between the ages of 11 and 17 (Petunia says she came home transfiguring cups and J.K. has said she got some warnings) and she didn't go to Azkaban either. Only people who are of age - Barty Jr, Bellatrix, Rodolphus, Rabastan, Stan, 50-something year old Hagrid, Dumbledore (threat of being sent there) - have ever been to Azkaban, or in Dumbledore's case been threatened with it. Thus, to me at least you CANNOT go to Azkaban under the age of seventeen. As for you, I'm not really bothered anymore. Do a Staff Survey, like the Once Upon a Time wiki did, and see how many people think you're a good (or bad) admin. THEN, we can decide what value your opinions have? UNDER-BLEEPING-STAND?! --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 02:11, December 9, 2013 (UTC) :::::I will admit your theory is interesting, and makes logical sense. However, there is still no hard evidence that someone under 17 cannot be placed in Azkaban. I think you've argued a strong enough case to warrant a "Behind the scenes" note on both this and Rodolphus's page noting their possible birth order, but I would still resist a direct mention in the main article as your points, though likely, are still unproven. And I would vastly prefer it if you keep incidental comments like my suitability of being an admin (which, incidentally, I am not one) out of this otherwise civil discussion. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 02:31, December 9, 2013 (UTC) No-one in canon - not in the books or revealed by J.K. Rowling - has been underage and gone to Azkaban. Hagrid was a MURDERER - albeit framed - at 15 and he didn't go to Azkaban. Harry and Lily both broke the statute of Secrecy, Lily by transfiguring cups and getting warnings and Harry by blowing up Marge and saving Dudley's ass. And, as Fudge - the Minister of Magic, no less - didn't suggest it, it's incredibly likely to not be an option at all. Expulsion and made to live as a Muggle, yes; Going to Azkaban, no. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 02:37, December 9, 2013 (UTC) :In several books, Harry fears he had done something worthy of a sentence in Azkaban. Why would he fear this if it were impossible? -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 02:45, December 9, 2013 (UTC) He grew up with Muggles and, even in OOtP - as he has to ask what the Wizengamot is - he doesn't know much about the Wizarding World; he's fearing because he knows Hagrid went there, but is ignorant of it himself. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 02:56, December 9, 2013 (UTC) :'Tis true. And thus we arrive back at "convincing argument, but no hard proof". I would like someone else to weigh in on the matter, as I think we've reached equilibrium as far as our arguments for and against this point. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 03:08, December 9, 2013 (UTC) Agreed - someone summon the admins! --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 03:11, December 9, 2013 (UTC) ::Case in point, Hagrid was not sent to Azkaban for killing Myrtle because he was never formally accused of anything. Dippet expelled Hagrid and had his wand snapped but kept the whole incident hush-hush: Riddle says in chapter 13 of Chamber of Secrets "I caught the person who'd opened the Chamber and he was expelled. But the Headmaster, Professor Dippet, ashamed that such a thing had happened at Hogwarts, forbade me to tell the truth. A story was given out that the girl had died in a freak accident. They gave me a nice, shiny, engraved trophy for my trouble and warned me to keep my mouth shut. But I knew it could happen again. The monster lived on, and the one who had the power to release it was not imprisoned." ::Riddle's wording makes it seem that they could've had Hagrid imprisoned if they'd gone ahead with it, although I still am not convinced of either possibility: whether underage students can go to Azkaban or not, we don't know (and, of course, since we don't know, we mustn't use that to support another argument). -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 03:23, December 9, 2013 (UTC) ::Can we trust Riddle's wording though? He is trying to stall Harry at the time. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 03:40, December 9, 2013 (UTC) ::: This debate has drifted wildly off-topic. This matter has no bearing on Rabastan's age in relation to Rodolphous.-- 05:34, December 9, 2013 (UTC) ::::True. Anyway, the "new info" HarryPotterRules1 presented doesn't really allow us to conclude anything about Rodolphus and Rabastan's relative ages. Consider this: even if we go ahead and assume one has to be of-age to be sent to Azkaban (which is currently unproven; unaddressed in canon) and if we ignore the complications that arouse from the whole "Snape went to Hogwarts with the Lestranges" piece of info (Snape went to Hogwarts 1971-1978, while Bellatrix went there 1962-1969 or 1963-1970 -- the dates don't overlap; I think the correct interpretation of that line is that "they ran with the same crowd"), we'd still be unable to conclude Rabastan is the younger brother. ::::What we'd be able to conclude is that Rodolphus would have been born between September 1953 and 1963; and that Rabastan would have been born before 1963. We wouldn't know how long before. It would be entirely non-contradictory to affirm that Rabastan was born before Rodolphus. -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 21:10, December 9, 2013 (UTC) I can see I'm going to lose this fight too. Sometimes, you know, I do think you hate me. It's obvious - absolutely obvious. Sometimes, I wonder why I bothered reading the books at all? I'd have never found this place and not been so stressed that I'm in therapy over "the reason admins and other wikia members are evil and hate me." --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 21:50, December 9, 2013 (UTC) :It's not about win or lose and even if it were, we've all lost at one time or another. It so happens that this, being the biggest and most well-known wiki about Harry Potter (my teacher made us look things up on here, and the Pottermore information confused the heck out of most kids, as did the move from "Gregorovitch" to "Mykew Gregorovitch"), is also the strictest wiki. Over the course of eight years (nine this coming summer), a lot of information has been added without direct book or film sources, and that's what the wiki is trying to cut out. I do hope you know it isn't you everyone is trying to go after - absolutely not! Nobody on here hates you, it's just that over however many years each editor has been on here, we've all developed a sort of dislike towards anything new or radical ... I think I'm the last "new" user to be really and truly accepted, and I can't help but wonder if it's a stiff sort of net disapproval for everything that isn't old and old-fashioned. --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 22:05, December 9, 2013 (UTC) They do hate me and they are out to get me. If things are so strict on this wiki - and seem to be almost Victorian in values - then maybe it's time some of the older ones, the nagging fuddy duddys, moved on and let the younger ones have a shot. In the words of Sirius (paraphrased), their time is over and we're the young ones now. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 22:11, December 9, 2013 (UTC) :This is nonsense. I don't believe I've ever been offensive or disrespectful to you, in fact, when I see no fault in an argument you present I, logically, support it; if one proves another wrong it's not because he hates him, it's because, well, he thinks the other is wrong. If you think my case against yours does not apply, in this particular argument, then argue back -- don't start saying that everyone is prosecuting you and that no one likes you. :There are no winning sides on any discussion, as far as this wiki is concerned; there are just arguments for the sake of arguments. -- [[User:Seth Cooper| Seth Cooper ]][[User talk:Seth Cooper| owl post!]] 22:36, December 9, 2013 (UTC) ^My point made. --HarryPotterRules1 (talk) 22:48, December 9, 2013 (UTC) :HPR1, no offence, but to me this latest post makes little sense. How can Seth telling you he supports you and your opinion and that people argue for the topic rather than for the others arguers' characters, ever amount to him saying everyone hates you? --Hunnie Bunn (talk) 22:53, December 9, 2013 (UTC)